Arthur S. Brisbane caught some flak a week or so ago when he wrote about the need for fact-checking --- or as he called it, truth vigilantes --- at his news organization. Some inferred he meant the TImes needed to publish facts instead of fiction and thought it was an obvious sentiment.
But Brisbane was after something more, a form of regular challenging of assertions that often slip into stories without much thought. In some instances a countering view will "balance" that assertion. Brisbane believes that's a false balance.
What he wants is a reality-check, or some sort of measured rebuttal, particularly as an election approaches in the United States. He agrees it can't be argumentative, but believes there is room to improve journalism standards by keeping a more vigilant watch on rhetoric.
His latest column lays out the case.
But Brisbane was after something more, a form of regular challenging of assertions that often slip into stories without much thought. In some instances a countering view will "balance" that assertion. Brisbane believes that's a false balance.
What he wants is a reality-check, or some sort of measured rebuttal, particularly as an election approaches in the United States. He agrees it can't be argumentative, but believes there is room to improve journalism standards by keeping a more vigilant watch on rhetoric.
His latest column lays out the case.
